Interactions Between Pre-Processing and Classification Methods for Event-Related-Potential Classification
- 1.2k Downloads
Detecting event related potentials (ERPs) from single trials is critical to the operation of many stimulus-driven brain computer interface (BCI) systems. The low strength of the ERP signal compared to the noise (due to artifacts and BCI irrelevant brain processes) makes this a challenging signal detection problem. Previous work has tended to focus on how best to detect a single ERP type (such as the visual oddball response). However, the underlying ERP detection problem is essentially the same regardless of stimulus modality (e.g. visual or tactile), ERP component (e.g. P300 oddball response, or the error-potential), measurement system or electrode layout. To investigate whether a single ERP detection method might work for a wider range of ERP BCIs we compare detection performance over a large corpus of more than 50 ERP BCI datasets whilst systematically varying the electrode montage, spectral filter, spatial filter and classifier training methods. We identify an interesting interaction between spatial whitening and regularised classification which made detection performance independent of the choice of spectral filter low-pass frequency. Our results show that pipeline consisting of spectral filtering, spatial whitening, and regularised classification gives near maximal performance in all cases. Importantly, this pipeline is simple to implement and completely automatic with no expert feature selection or parameter tuning required. Thus, we recommend this combination as a “best-practice” method for ERP detection problems.
KeywordsEEG ERP BCI Decoding LDA Spatial filtering Spectral filtering
The authors acknowledge the support of the BrainGain Smart Mix Programme of the Netherlands Ministry of Economic Affairs and the Netherlands Ministry of Education, Culture and Science.
- Birbaumer, N., Kubler, A., Ghanayim, N., Hinterberger, T., Perelmouter, J., Kaiser, J., Iversen, I., Kotchoubey, B., Neumann, N., Flor, H. (2000). The thought translation device (TTD) for completely paralyzed patients. IEEE Transactions on Rehabilitation Engineering, 8(2), 190–193. doi: 10.1109/86.847812.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Blankertz, B., Muller, K.R., Krusienski, D.J., Schalk, G., Wolpaw, J.R., Schlogl, A., Pfurtscheller, G., Millan, J.R., Schroder, M., Birbaumer, N. (2006). The BCI competition III: validating alternative approaches to actual BCI problems. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering, 14(2), 153–159. doi: 10.1109/TNSRE.2006.875642.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Bouchard, G., & Triggs, B. (2004). The tradeoff between generative and discriminative classifiers. In 16th IASC international symposium on computational statistics (COMPSTAT ‘04), Prague, Tcheque, Republique (pp. 721–728).Google Scholar
- Brown, R.G., & Hwang, P.Y.C. (1997). Introduction to random signals and applied Kalman filtering. Wiley, TK5102.5.B696 (Vol. 2). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
- Brunner, C., Naeem, M., Leeb, R., Graimann, B., Pfurtscheller, G. (2007). Spatial filtering and selection of optimized components in four class motor imagery EEG data using independent components analysis. Pattern Recognition Letters, 28(8), 957–964. doi: 10.1016/j.patrec.2007.01.002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Christoforou, C., Haralick, R., Sajda, P., Parra, L.C. (2010). Second-order bilinear discriminant analysis. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 11, 665–685.Google Scholar
- Duda, R.O., Hart, P.E., Stork, D.G. (2000). Pattern classification (2nd ed.). Wiley-Interscience.Google Scholar
- Hill, J., Farquhar, J., Martens, S., Bießmann, F., Schölkopf, B. (2008). Effects of stimulus type and of error-correcting code design on BCI speller performance. In Advances in neural information processing systems 21: 22nd Annual conference on neural information processing systems 2008 (pp. 665–672). Vancouver, BC: Corran.Google Scholar
- Hill, N.J., & Raths, C. (2007). New BCI approaches: Selective attention to auditory and tactile stimulus streams. In PASCAL workshop on methods of data analysis in computational neuroscience and brain computer interfaces. Berlin: Fraunhofer FIRST.Google Scholar
- Hill, N.J., Lal, T.N., Bierig, K., Birbaumer, N., Schölkopf, B. (2005). An auditory paradigm for brain-computer interfaces. In L.K. Saul, Y. Weiss, L. Bottou (Eds), Advances in neural information processing systems (Vol. 17, pp. 569–576). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Makeig, S., Bell, A., Jung, T., Sejnowski, T., et al. (1996). Independent component analysis of electroencephalographic data. In D. Touretzky, M. Mozer and M. Hasselmo (Eds.), Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 8 (pp. 145–151) Cambridge, MA: MIT PressGoogle Scholar
- Ng, A.Y., & Jordan, M.I. (2002). On discriminative vs. generative classifiers: A comparison of logistic regression and naive bayes. In Advances in neural information processing systems (pp. 841–848). Vancouver, BC: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Nunez, P.L., & Srinivasan, R. (2005). Electric fields of the brain: The neurophysics of EEG (2nd ed.). USA: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
- Nunez, P.L., Silberstein, R.B., Cadusch, P.J., Wijesinghe, R.S., Westdorp, A.F., Srinivasan, R., (1994). A theoretical and experimental study of high resolution EEG based on surface laplacians and cortical imaging. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 90(1), 40–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Schölkopf, B., & Smola, A.J. (2001). Learning with kernels: support vector machines, regularization, optimization, and beyond (1st ed.). The MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Selim, A.E., Wahed, M.A., Kadah, Y.M. (2008). Machine learning methodologies in brain-computer interface systems. In IEEE Cairo International Biomedical Engineering Conference (CIBEC) 2008, pp. 1–5. doi: 10.1109/CIBEC.2008.4786106.
- Tomioka, R., Aihara, K., Muller K. (2007). Logistic regression for single trial EEG classification. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 19, 1377–1384.Google Scholar
- Ye, J. (2006). Characterization of a family of algorithms for generalized discriminant analysis on undersampled problems. Journal of Machine Learning Research, 6(1), 483.Google Scholar